07-31-12 CTM Blog Entry Trial
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Judge Jean-Marc Lavergne questions witness Rochoem Ton at the ECCC on Tuesday. Witness Rochoem Ton Faces Questions from the Bench and Defense Teams on Third Day of Testimony By Erica Embree, JD/LLM (International Human Rights) candidate, Class of 2015, Northwestern University School of Law Trial Chamber Judge Jean-Marc Lavergne and the defense teams for Nuon Chea and Ieng Sary took their turn examining witness Rochoem Ton on Tuesday, July 31, 2012, in Case 002 against accused Nuon Chea, Khieu Samphan, and Ieng Sary at the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC). The morning proceedings were attended by 220 villagers from Kampot who left their village at 5 a.m. this morning in order to attend the proceedings. One hundred villagers from Kampong Som observed the afternoon proceedings. All parties were present in the courtroom, except Ieng Sary who continued to observe the proceedings via audio-visual equipment in his holding cell due to his health issues. Prior to giving the floor to the defense team for Nuon Chea, Trial Chamber President Nil Nonn asked the members of the bench if anyone had questions to put to Rochoem Ton. Judge Lavergne indicated he wished to examine the witness and took the floor with several questions. Judge Lavergne Questions the Witness on Khieu Samphan Judge Lavergne first asked the witness about when he first met Khieu Samphan. The witness confirmed that he met Khieu Samphan in 1971, explaining that they met when Khieu Samphan went into the military kitchen hall, and they exchanged greetings. Judge Lavergne inquired whether the witness knew about or had discussions with any of the leadership about Khieu Samphan’s role, specifically his involvement in the Royal Government of the National Union of Kampuchea (GRUNK). Mr. Rochoem replied that he was not aware of the details and that he was informed about Khieu Samphan’s role via radio broadcasts. The judge asked if the witness was aware of Khieu Samphan’s role in the armed forces for the liberation of the people of Kampuchea. The witness replied that he learned of Khieu Samphan’s role after he meeting him. He noted that at times he observed Khieu Samphan sitting in his residence, writing documents. He reiterated that he was not aware of the details of Khieu Samphan’s role and that he only learned of it through radio broadcasts. He added that at that time, they were located in the jungle. Regarding who was in charge overall of the Revolutionary Army of Kampuchea, the witness explained that Ieng Sary had gone to work at that time in Office K-7, which Mr. Rochoem described as “mainly the farming part.” He noted that Ieng Sary did not talk of soldiers then, but of the mobile forces. He said that Kham was then responsible for the mobile unit and concluded that this was how he became aware of the mobile units, adding that it was in Ratanakiri in late 1968. After indicating that he was more concerned with what happened after King Norodom Sihanouk fell from power, Judge Lavergne inquired whether the armed forces were being lead by one person in charge or by individual zone leaders. Mr. Rochoem explained that after the coup d’état he was located at Office 1 and was a rice farmer. He clarified that during that time, they referred to mobile forces, not military or soldiers. He described how mobile forces were sent twice in groups of 150 people to “rest and assist in rice farming.” He also testified that the mobile forces were responsible for securing two roads, one from Borkeo to Andong Meas and the other from Borkeo to Oyadao, or Road 19, which he described as being “interrupted” by the enemy. He concluded that he was not aware of who commanded the mobile forces. When asked about changes in the zone leaders’s roles after 1973 when certain Vietnamese troops departed, the witness stated that he did not notice changes in the roles of the leadership in 1973, when Office 871 was the main office. He indicated he did not know about the zone level. Moving on, Judge Lavergne asked the witness whether he witnessed firsthand the meetings to which he had testified occurring between Pol Pot, Khieu Samphan, Nuon Chea, Ieng Sary, and others. The witness replied, “In 1973, in some areas I was the firsthand witness, … and I was not told about other meetings where I was not present.” Judge Lavergne inquired whether Mr. Rochoem ever noticed any matters discussed resulting in disagreements between Pol Pot, Khieu Samphan, Nuon Chea, and Ieng Sary during the meetings he witnessed, or whether there was always “perfect, harmonious consensus.” The witness testified that he did not notice any disagreements, adding that they were in “harmonious agreement. It was peaceful amongst them.” He continued explaining the meetings about which he previously testified, specifically about his awareness of them. He emphasized that he only talked about meetings that he “personally participated in,” adding that he “had no knowledge of other meetings.” Next, Judge Lavergne asked how forces within Cambodia and figureheads abroad communicated, such as when Ieng Sary was in China. Mr. Rochoem confirmed that communication occurred, explaining that it was mainly through telegram. He stated that telegram 2 exchange continued after 1973 “between themselves and between the zone level. Of course, through such communication, it facilitated the journey from one place to another.” Regarding whether he was involved in the preparation of Prince Norodom Sihanouk’s trip in 1973, the witness stated that when the prince visited the liberated zone in 1973, he greeted him. He added that many came throughout Ratanakiri province to do so and that many went with the prince throughout his trip, including to Siem Reap and on through to his departure. The witness testified that he was supplied protection to Prince Sihanouk. Switching to another topic, Judge Lavergne inquired whether the witness heard about a national congress occurring on February 24 and 25, 1975, which was lead by Khieu Samphan as Vice Prime Minister of GRUNK. The witness replied that he learned of it through radio broadcasts but added that he was not aware of the location of the meeting. Regarding whether he also heard about a list of “seven super traitors” when he heard of the meeting, Mr. Rochoem replied that he did not, ading, “I did not pay much attention to the so-called seven traitors.” Regarding whether any leaders made proclamations via radio broadcast after Phnom Penh fell, the witness explained that there was a radio broadcast that “all the spearheads at 9:30 am on that day had liberated the city and that they would meet in the center of the city.” When asked who the intended recipients for these messages were, the witness testified, “The announcement was made to the entire nation and probably also listened to by the international side.” He added that he personally possessed a radio then. Regarding who authored them, the witness stated that the announcement was made by Khieu Samphan, the commander of the military troops of the GRUNK. Judge Lavergne moved on, asking the witness next whether he was aware of a special national congress purported to have been lead by Khieu Samphan that occurred on April 24, 25, and 27 in 1975 and that summoned “representatives of the people of Kampuchea and the three categories of the people’s armies, as well as the monks and the FUNK [National United Front of Kampuchea].” The witness responded, “I heard of that announcement on the radio.” He further testified that he could not recall the substance of the broadcast. Judge Lavergne Focuses on Evacuations Judge Lavergne then asked questions relating to evacuations. Turning first to the major meeting the witness previously testified had occurred in June 1974, Judge Lavergne asked the witness to confirm whether the evacuation of cities, including of Udong, Stung Treng, Skun, and Kratie, as well as liberated zones was discussed there. The witness succinctly stated that he had nothing additional to say on this matter. 3 The judge asked about potential positive effects of the evacuation. Mr. Rochoem replied, “I only understand the term evacuation. I learned about this only on one occasion at B-5, and I have no idea of other detailed aspects concerning this.” Judge Lavergne quoted from the witness’s Thursday testimony, “I learned this during his presentation. Pol Pot, Nuon Chea and Khieu Samphan presented this idea to us. It was the experience that they had learned, and we had to learn from these positive experiences in order to liberate Phnom Penh in the end.” Judge Lavergne asked whether the three figures mentioned in this quote, either alone or together, presented to him the “positive experience” of evacuation. After stating that the Pol Pot, Nuon Chea, and Khieu Samphan remained “together permanently before and after the liberation” of Phnom Penh, the witness said that he did not have anything else to say, adding, “I’m afraid my statement will be repetitive.” Judge Lavergne attempted to obtain clarification on when the training and study sessions he spoke about took place, before or after the liberation of Phnom Penh, or both. The witness replied that there was a meeting in early April and after the liberation, there was another meeting. He repeated that he already testified about this and had nothing additional to add. Indicating that the witness previously testified about an important B-5 meeting in early April 1975, Judge Lavergne asked whether the training sessions the witness had mentioned were different from the April 1975 meeting and whether they occurred before or after April 1975.